More on my fiction writing

July 09, 2014

The omen

The mainstream media are all over it: the "crisis of kids at the border" — children, not baby goats. Some outlets are joining in with the right-wing echo chamber to make this, finally something, into "Obama's Katrina."

In fact, the phenomenon of unaccompanied minors being sent norte has its origins in an obscure and well-intended law signed by President George W. Bush. You know, the one with the real Katrina. The situation has been made worse by corrupt Central American governments, our appetite for drugs and cheap labor, and federal austerity.

I will leave it to others to report more clearly on the children at the border — other than to note that the $3.7 billion requested by President Obama to respond to the situation represents 0.1 percent of the federal budget. But more than twice the annual federal support for beleaguered Amtrak.

My mission is different. It is to pose the question of what happens when climate change and all the disruptions it brings really kicks in? It is already at least partly to blame for conflicts and dislocation, such as the Syrian civil war. But we ain't seen nothing yet.

Human-caused climate change, especially if left unaddressed, has the potential to cause such damage on an overpopulated planet that any sober discussion risks sounding alarmist. So what happens when millions upon millions of the displaced huddled masses show up on the southern border?

I can't imagine a thinking person who disputes the settled science. But some cling to the positive outcomes. Faster shipping routes through an ice-free Northwest Passage! A warmer Arctic opened for drilling more oil! Championship golf on the melting permafrost (watch the methane traps)!

And — although rarely spoken — the conceit that climate change is something that will largely affect what was once called the Third World, brown and black folks. Not real Americans.

In fact, the tribulations of the coming years are likely to send the Third World to us. Massive movements of population would come not merely from rising temperatures, loss of food and water supplies, and increases in tropical diseases. Before those sources become clear, we and Europe and even Mexico would experience the consequences of more subtle destabilizations, as have happened in the Middle East.

The Republican scorched-earth policy on immigration was poisonous on many levels. It was hypocritical. It was racist. It was cynical politics to draw in the scared Anglos that wanted Des Moines in the desert. Perhaps worst of all, it made a real, highly complex and serious issue into another shrill GOPer trope. To be, unless you are a True Believer, dismissed or resisted with equal and mirror-image fervor.

In this, the Republicans once again prove to be the Party That Wrecked America.

Let me explain.

The immigration "issue" of SB 1070, the Badged Ego, Russell Pearce, Jan Brewer and countless election victories in Arizona was always bogus. Illegal immigrants were (and remain) essential to the state's economy, helping make the Anglo elite rich and giving average people cheap lawn care and housekeeping. And the pluses of cheap, malleable and fearful workers became apparent to companies nationwide. I have written about this before, including here and here.

Deportation was never going to happen for 12 million or 15 million illegal immigrants already here. Neither was "sweeping immigration reform." Fear of the brown people was too politically potent for the GOP to actually try to solve something.

The same thing is true for "secure the border." That means different things to different people. To the rubes in suburban Arizona, it means fences, minefields, a new Berlin Wall. The people they elect generally hold a more, well, situational approach. You don't expect a good God-fearin' Anglo contractor to pay union wages to citizens, do you? To the extent that SB 1070 has been implemented — and the reputation it has given Arizona — it has been devastating to the state economy.

(And yes, I am old enough to remember when the border was a line in the sand, as Cal would say. People came and went easily. That was a much less populous Southwest and Mexico. And no, we can't go back to 1491.)

But none of this means there aren't real issues surrounding immigration. For example, with 314 million people, a stressed environment, and an economy in secular stagnation, how many more workers can and should the United States allow via immigration? This is a discussion barely glanced at amid the hysteria about the illegals already here and making your goods and services less expensive.

Things get really dicey as 7 billion-and-growing earthlings start to be kicked around by abused Mother Nature.

This is why it's important to be keep most of the carbon in the ground through a carbon tax or cap-and-trade, engage in aggressive research and conservation, seed new clean industries, eliminate fossil fuel subsidies, rebuild our passenger-train system, enhance transit and build high-speed rail. Do all that — and yes, America acting alone if necessary is a great start.

And figure out intelligent, constructive aid for countries at risk. Again, we haven't even been thinking about this amid the meme that a bunch of Mexicans put guns to our heads and forced us to pay them below-legal wages for back-breaking work.

Some progressives take the attitude that all immigration is good, brings no costs; that immigration at any levels carries no risks or unintended consequences; that America should be prepared to fix every humanitarian trouble that arrives. This is lazy thinking caused in reaction to the hate of the right.

In fact, immigration, the economy, the environment, social justice and climate change are tied up together. America has become ungovernable. So that means we can't engage in thoughtful debate or responses.

Unless that changes, many bad things will transpire. Among them: someday the "crisis on the border" will be beyond imagining.

Comments

You can follow this conversation by subscribing to the comment feed for this post.

Do you think climate change could eventually cause economic and human capital to relocate to places of fair climate and out of places of poor climate? And that it could lead to a hereditary acquisition of capital and affluent living due to place of birth and not (as much) color of skin? An acquisition of capital that is an unequal, but overall accepted, unifying identity for two discrete and disparate groups? Similar to the way white supremacy has tied together poor southern farmers to rich southern landholders and Northern labor to northern industrialists? A new privileged identity based on place and not race?

I'm not sure if the clowns to the left can rightly blame the jokers to the right for the genesis of their "lazy thinking".

That lets them off the hook too easily.

The left's failure to think clearly on immigration is derived from who they are: their inherent belief in the goodness of humanity and their desire to save every homeless dog and mewling kitten from the pound. Perhaps we should all adopt a hamster and little Pedro too....

In point of fact on immigration the right wing is mostly correct: What part of illegal don't you understand? That's absolute truth. These people are in the country illegally. And if we are going to have nation-states (and that sure the hell looks like the accepted global model) than a country has every right to control its border. Or suffer the consequences...

About 4 years ago I wrote several posts arguing that since the Republicans won't allow another stimulus, Obama needed to do an end-around to fill the spending-hole. I urged Obama to ask Congress for money for 40,000 border control agents. Which is to say: 40,000 middle class jobs to get the economy going. And dare Republicans to veto that cash infusion into the economy...

Well my post met with stony silences on liberal blogs.
And no wonder, why would a liberal get behind spending money that way? The idea went against left-wing scripture and didn't save one flea-ridden puppy either...

Now, given recent events, I clearly nailed the correct policy again. But no biggy. To paraphrase Orwell: In a country of left-eyed and right-eyed cyclopean morons, the person with two eyes looking forward, is a genius.

I am afraid US immigration and border policy has nothing to do with the law but profit (for the employer hiring illegals, the justice/prison industrial complex), and to fire up the respective "bases" of our corrupt two party system.

Ok, I'll take your puppy-saving insult about liberals if you'll agree that the "personal responsibility" crowd on the right somehow thought that there IS such a thing as a free lunch when it comes to hiring cheap labor, busting unions, and being addicted to getting the lowest price. Sorry, but sooner or later, the bill comes
due.

My therapist told me to only think positive thoughts. After reading Mr. Talton's words,I don' know what to do. Go to Sedona and meditate with my head in the sand? Dear me...Mr. Talton's articles are so disturbing to my state of bliss in denial.
At least Fox News is calming with its simple answer to all distrurbing thoughts: its Obama's fault.

"America has become ungovernable. So that means we can't engage in thoughtful debate or responses." A more true statement has not been made by anyone. I'm sitting reflecting on one of my State Representatives who is running for a second term ... Ms. Townshead covering Gold Canyon, AZ. Her stances make me shutter; and I'm a Republican.

Do you think climate change could eventually cause economic and human capital to relocate to places of fair climate and out of places of poor climate?

Sorry #theintellectualassassin, but from my readings on the situation (and I've had my eye on this since well before Al Gore's heads-up,) a key factor is going to be general destabilization of climate - as in, for example, it's going to become a matter of art to even know when to plant the crops "this year," and even if a full "season" will be permitted.

There won't be any "fair climate" zones - it will all be very lurchy. That's why this is dangerous to larger life forms like us. About the only animals that have a healthy chance (aside from insects) are probably the birds, since they can migrate on a moment's notice. They are ancient - their roots are in the dinosaurs and they have certainly seen a cataclysm or two.

I am not well informed on all of the nuance of this topic, however, I believe that the US and Central American governments are, in large part, responsible for the crisis. When I traveled through Central America a few years ago, in nearly every major city we would see women who gathered in large groups to protest. It had to do with NAFTA and large corporate farms squeezing out the indigenous way of life. The result is a bunch of people who can no longer support themselves on subsistence farming.

Terry Dudas: No Point. I wrote those first two lines just to stimulate some inane reactions. Sorry to hear you are so poor you have to do your cleaning. Reminds me of a movie, "A day without a Mexican".

Petro thanks for the Food gathers post, great stuff. I sent it on to Jared.

Population,was Malthus wrong?
But Petro, God will provide.
Ruben, U know that Jesus guy he can break bread and bring forth fish and feed the poor. That is if those Romans from Monsanto dont crucify him first.

Near as I can tell, immigration law is a patchwork of competing interests (always the LE/industrial-prison complex, US employers -- will they ever be held accountable?, do-gooders, and the militarized border folks). But the underlying causes are American made -- drugs, anti-unionism, cheap labor, and our corporate overlords squeezing every penny they can out of croplands and, coming soon, water. There will be no easy fix: expect revolutions and turmoil to the South.

Transgendered nomads? I'm calling BS on that photo essay (and also due to the large amount of store-bought clothes and goods).

Population has trended right along with our petroleum-based economies. That will not end well. We're probably 5 billion over sustainable.

You guys are making me feel like a pedant, but - really? Are you really advancing the point that there is no difference between causes and symptoms? If you were in the medical field, this is an important distinction, and I see no reason not to give it the same weight in the sociological and economic spheres.

This does apply to the immigration "question" as well. Disparate economies, made possible by the borders and sovereign communities they separate, are more responsible (cause) the immigration problems than immigration (symptom) itself. If one does not see the difference between cause and symptom, then one is reflexively going to attack the symptom - in the case of immigration, you end up with wkg's barbed wire, mine fields and machine guns. Population? Birth quotas and god knows what other morally challenging approaches.

Ruben, to be specific with your example - if we eat all of the blue fin tuna, and that is the only thing we know how to eat, then of course our population will cull quite quickly at the end of the feast. Population, or lack thereof, is a symptom of the state of the resources, regardless as to how they were diminished. The thing with humans is that we have something called sentience, so we can, theoretically at least, rise above the stupidity of the yeast in a petri dish. I once read of a contemporary hunter/gatherer tribe (sorry, no links) that limited its foraging to one cardinal point per year (season?) so as to let the other three replenish. It's called awareness.

Can we sustain our global population even if we pass policies to stymy climate change? Because if we are facing a mass die-off regardless of our actions... What's the point? Can I keep my lifted truck in the face of an extinction level event?

PS--the idea of an armed guards patrolling a fenced border reminds me a little too much of 19th century Indian reservations AKA the original concentration camps. Is there a way to police the border without I humanely criminalizing the actions of labor refugees?

@Cal: I don’t know how you do it. You were a cop for what, 20 – 25 years? You much have witnessed every sort of human depravity that exists. I’m pretty much of the Christian viewpoint that we’re all natural born sinners.

Glad I'm not the only one ranting about Amtrak. I am in agreement about the rail system being our ticket out. Rail covers our entire nation. Why the heck can't we cover it with bullet trains or solar rails and put the darn airlines out of business? Why hasn't someone invented a darn solar blimp for that matter? Put the darn airlines down!
For that matter, I see know reason why we can't put the National guard at the border and get a decent wall built and enforce it. Create a special for it. Use technology FFS and let people come and go for work purposes and make this thing run like it should this is the digital age at 2014. Why is it the movie 2010 still looks like the space age and we all are living in some Gorge Orwell horror flick? Screw the damn iphones and tablets!! Lets get this place looking clean and spacey before we all crash and burn.

@Smart thoughtful people: two questions and I promise to sit the rest of this thread out.

Question one: what needs to change in our immigration laws. Please don’t answer that the change needed is that the quota should be high enough that no one has to come illegally (unless you’re willing to explain why 10 or 20 million immigrants per year would be a good thing: with 300,000 or 400,000 per year settling in Phoenix.)

Question two: Is it possible to have anything besides open borders without securing said borders?

Sorry to ask such simple questions – but I’m still trying to crawl out of a petri dish.

Immigration is happening on a global scale, not just into the U.S. People are fleeing tyranny and war in their home countries. Anti-immigrant sentiment and yes, anti-Semitism is increasing everywhere, which brings us back to Jon's original point - given the realities of climate change, migration will become the natural order of things. Big problem. The other huge problem wrought by NAFTA and other globalization economics needed to feed the capitalist beast is whether discrete borders are even realistic anymore. As I said before, you simply cannot exploit cheap labor and national resources just so Americans can get a new TV every two years and expect to not pay a price. We are reaping what we've sown.

wkg, while I have no answer for you, I hope you don't mind that I make an observation.

Our increasingly labrynthine laws - laws upon laws upon laws - are indirect evidence that we do not deal with problems in a systemic or even particularly thoughtful ways. This is what happens when one tries to mitigate problems (symptoms) instead of addressing the underlying reasons the problems crop up (cause.)

The very formulation of your question is precisely targeting a symptom, and I will argue that there is no answer to your question that will bring a desirable result. Whatever is tried in order to address such a question will only create another problem (symptom) that will end up contorting our body of law even further.

The answer you don't want ("the change needed is that the quota should be high enough") is illustrative, in that you recognize that it would result in another problem ("300,000 or 400,000 per year settling in Phoenix.") Very good. But let's say that full lockdown is actually possible (it isn't) and it "solves" the immigration problem - what do you think the next discomfort that would emerge from that would be? I'd predict that, after the soreness of the immigration problem recedes into the past, we'd be left with a very dysfunctional situation resulting from a fully-militarized border. Gosh, what do we do about the rampant prostitution and venereal disease epidemic (to cite a somewhat hoary ill associated with military towns) in Tucson, San Diego, etc. etc. etc...?

Reframe the question by looking at the cause. The cause is economic and political, it does not rest on the shoulders of the migrants.

Well another post – but since it’s not about immigration or that stuff I feel like it should get a pass.

Just finished “The Life and Times of the Thunderbolt Kid” by Bill Bryson (one of my favorite authors). It’s about growing up in Des Moines, Iowa in the fifties. Des Moines – if you’ll overlook the geographic, weather and horticultural aspects sounds an awful like Rogue’s description of Phoenix at the time. You probably have to be of a certain age to appreciate a lot of it. But if you find Rogue’s Phoenix 101 articles you might want to check it out. Here are the last two paragraphs:

That’s the way of the world, of course. Possessions get discarded. Life moves on. But I often think what a shame it is that we didn’t keep the things that made us different and special and attractive in the fifties. Imagine those palatial downtown movie theaters with their vast screens and Egyptian décor; but thrillingly enlivened with Dolby sound and slick computer graphics. Now that would be magic. Imagine having all of public life – offices, stores, restaurants, entertainments – conveniently clustered in the heart of the city and experiencing fresh air and daylight every time you moved from one to another. Imagine having a cafeteria with atomic toilets, a celebrated tea room that gave away gifts to young customers, a clothing store with a grand staircase and a mezzanine, a Kiddie Corral where you could read comic books to your heart’s content. Imagine have a city full of things that no other had.

What a wonderful world that would be. What a wonderful world it was. We won’t see its like again, I’m afraid.

WKG: I think its wonderful that you find Bill Bryson such wonderful reading. Personally he puts me to sleep after two paragraphs. I was born in Iowa. Just a few miles south of Des Moines, in the river bottom of Middle River just off highway 69. Born on the kitchen floor of a farm house with no electricity and no running water, no inside toilet. Just Sears catalogs and red and white corn cobs for toilet paper. No doctor and no birth certificate. I spent the 40's there and went back and forth in the fifties to work the fields and work for the state milk testing bureau.
Bryson has his view I got mine. I almost starved and froze to death in the forties and thought Phoenix Arizona was heaven on earth when I arrived in January of 50. I do not miss Iowa and in addition to the above I do not miss the psychological religious oppression that I endured as a young person.

@Petro: I’m sorry I just can’t stand it. Nicaragua seems to be an especially bad place – and source of the “refugees”. Would you support the invasion of the country? Round up all senior government, military and business leaders. Have a monkey trial and charge them for crimes against humanity and hang them all?

No, wkg, because I am not of their character. My character is one that would take in and protect the disabused, not lash out in anger and further the cycles of violence of which I am becoming very, very weary.

Also, as I have stated before, I am not too quick to judge "others" (like Nicaragua-the-idea,) when I have plenty to account for right here at home. Maybe when I am done with that, and me and mine are pure and perfect, I will take on this "Nicaragua."

And, not incidentally, let's appreciate the incredibly privileged position that the United States is in, not having some other Uber-United States out there that might turn its might against us. We're still in the catbird's seat for now, and we're spending our international social capital like it's never going to go out of style. It is, and we should be mindful of it.

---

According to health and genetics, I am condemned to attend this sad parade for around 25 years or so more. I don't have to cooperate with it.

Could this tidal wave of apocalyptic and zombie movies/books/TV be subliminal training so that the masses are prepared to casually and inhumanely treat the "hordes" of "invaders" heading to our shores?

"I am old enough to remember when the border was a line in the sand, as Cal would say. People came and went easily. That was a much less populous Southwest and Mexico. And no, we can't go back to 1491."

Prior to the First World War, anyone could decide to come to the United States, live here, and have children here. They didn't need to see the U.S. Consulate in their country to obtain an immigration visa. They didn't need to be sponsored by a family member already living here or by an employer. There was no annual quota limiting total worldwide immigration to the U.S.; and there was no cap limiting immigrants from any single country to 7 percent of total immigration.

If that isn't an "open borders" policy I don't know what is!

As a result, literally hordes of Italians, Irish, Germans, Poles and other Eastern Europeans, Scandinavians, and others, came here. If you don't believe that America is a land of (primarily non-English) immigrants, just look at these surnames from a recent Sunday obituaries list in the Arizona Republic:

That's nearly half of the total listing, and those are only the obvious ones, not including anglicized spellings and ambiguous entries; and I also excluded Irish, Scots, and Latino names so that I couldn't be accused of shooting fish in a barrel.

As for "lazy thinking", I'm willing to be educated, but so far as I can see, illegal immigration cannot be stopped. Either it sneaks across rivers or land borders, or it comes in legally on tourist or other temporary visas and overstays. So the real choice is whether we want these immigrants to be legal or illegal. Either way, they're coming. It isn't a question of whether you (or I) do or don't want them here.

If you think illegal immigration can be reduced to a trickle, it's up to you to explain how. That might be an interesting discussion. Remember that walls cannot stop tourists and other legal visitors from overstaying their visas. Remember that walls can be tunneled under, climbed over, rammed through, or dynamited. Drug smuggling cartels prove this regularly. Surely human smuggling cartels making $2,500 a head have access to digging tools, tall ladders and movable ramps, bulldozers, and even construction grade explosives.

Yes, where triple walls have been built, provided they are also monitored around the clock, illegal immigration has dramatically decreased, moving to border sectors with easier access. So, too, does an opportunistic thief look for open windows, unlocked doors, and cars with keys left in the ignition. But when everybody locks their doors and windows and takes their keys, then break-ins and hotwiring become the norm, because that's all that's possible. So too walls along a 2,000 mile border.

And if somehow you do keep the border secure, overstays by legal visitors using fairly easy to obtain day visas will increase to accomodate those who cannot sneak in. The enormous expense of construction and of the manpower necessary to guard every section of fencing 24 hours a day is risible if would-be immigrants can enter legally and overstay their "temporary" visas.

If "secure" right-to-work documents are the solution, please explain how they can be issued without relying on insecure documents and data (e.g., birth certificates, SSNs) for proof of eligibility. Also explain who will vote for mandatory registration for a federal ID card in a Congress filled with paranoid conservatives and ACLU liberals.

If E-Verify is your solution, please explain how a system which cannot detect stolen identities (provided the name, d.o.b. and SSN match) can be used to prevent illegal immigrants from obtaining jobs? Such a system, if made universal and mandatory through federal law, can only increase the incidence of identity theft.

If, like Robert Robb, you believe that E-Verify can be fixed by cross-referencing Social Security data with IRS filings showing the working addresses of employees (thus revealing duplications at multiple workplaces), please explain the details.

If E-Verify is made mandatory and universal it will be for new hires, not retroactive to the roughly 140 million existing workers, so detecting illegals who are already here will be slow going.

During periods of heavy illegal immigration, a million or more new illegals may cross the southern border annually, not including those who enter legally but overstay their visas. If just 10 percent of the 13 million (or more) illegals already here change jobs during a year's time, that adds another 1.3 million to the caseload. Add visa overstayers. So far, from all sources, we're talking nearly 3 million new cases each year.

How many agents investigating paperwork discrepancies would be necessary to detect, investigate, interview, arrest, and testify, to prevent a case backlog which would make the system an unenforceable joke? If getting caught is improbable, illegals would still be willing to take the risk, since they already take risks.

What happens when duplications arise as a result of a citizen or other legal resident changing jobs, working multiple jobs, or moving from one residence or locale to another?

Many new illegals are young men and women who might use the identities of legal residents in the 16-22 age range, many of whom have yet to enter the workforce or who participate in the labor force only sporadically. In those cases there will be no duplication; or if there is, later, it will be the legal resident who does the duplicating.

When the situation is ambiguous, will citizens as well as illegals experience visits by agents at their workplaces and homes, demanding they prove their identity?

Since neither the Social Security Administration nor the Internal Revenue Service is responsible for immigration enforcement, the immigration authorities will need their own computer system incorporating the SSA and IRS database information (including new data as it is added) on a real-time basis, as well as special software to sift through enormous amounts of data and perform the cross-referencing and other filter testing needed to detect possibly suspicious duplications. Is this practical? Is it legal? If not, would Congress support legislation modifying the law to allow this?

P.S. In order to be integrated with the immigration agency's new computer system, the computer systems and software of both the SSA and the IRS would also have to be overhauled, since at present there is no such information transfer channel between agencies.

Great points, Emil. For it to "work," all citizens will have to "show their papers" on demand, and then of course we will not have solved the problem. We will only succeed in stamping further down on liberty... kinda like airports these days.

Lah te dah. Once again people do not want to finally embrace the information state and what it will take to solve this problem and help fix so much of what ails America.

Papers are archaic. Time to do a real id, based on a chip and holograph of the person, along with some dna analysis if there is a real question.

As for the integrated database, might as well have the darn NSA do it, after all they have the supercomputers and access to all the databases.

Then, with that in place, the world changes. If you remain here without that id, you are subject to instant deportation. Period. And if you have citizen dependents you get the choice of turning them over to the state, or taking them back to your home country. And if you employ illegals, well, you too are going to pay up to the full current extent of the law.

No more H1B visas, no more accommodation to business either. You need workers, then pay for them. Enough killing American wages to enrich capital.

As for the dreamers, you want to stay, five years of national service with a $300 a month paycheck for full time. Couples with one spouse who is illegal can either submit to the five year requirement, or leave.

No amnesty for felons. Some review of what constitutes a felony.

Everybody has to compromise to some extent, and through that compromise many changes are possible, like secure tax payments and secure credit cards.

So much crime will disappear when the ability to shift states and do it again goes away.

Thanks Petro.
Today I had to tell genius intern at work, the world takes forever to change, until we get a crisis, then it all becomes possible. So wait until the crisis, because logic and reality don't matter to the effing stupid politicians.

The American Way, eff it off until you positively, absolutely, have to fix it.

At this rate, Fred Duval is gonna have a chance against the craziest of our new Tea Party.

"Papers are archaic. Time to do a real id, based on a chip and holograph of the person, along with some dna analysis if there is a real question."

You're missing the point. In addition to establishing identity, you have to establish legal residency and legal status to work. If you take the DNA of anyone who applies and give them a holographic card, all you are doing is giving yourself a false sense of security.

In order to establish whether someone is eligible to receive your high-tech ID card, you must first establish their legal residency and a legal status that confers the right to be employed in the United States, you have to rely on the insecure proofs that we currently use (e.g., SSNs, birth certificates, driver's licenses), all of which can be forged, stolen, or fraudulently obtained.

Ah, but the databases are available to verify so much of it. And when you put the final nails in the coffin of dna testing, the database for nearly 99% spring into full existence. Now, if upon follow up, the base id was fraudulent, it will be child's play to bring them in.

I think you underestimate the amount of data we already have, and the cross correlative effects of everything. For instance, all males over the age of 18 should have registered for selective service- with the exception of that gap from the mid 70s to the early 80s.

The real rollup is the dna database, because it pushes so much into the realm of no more fraud. And I would note we already pull a dna sample from everyone in the judicial system...plus the military, plus a whole lot more.

In short, when you add in so much of the real database behind the scenes to effective enforcement on the front end, well most of it already done, and just not in your face.

After all, your credit card companies have a better grip on who you are than the IRS, because we hamstring the IRS in the name of nonexistent privacy.

And did I mention the facial recognition stuff we keep in the backroom so as not to scare the old folks?

Now throw in those files we keep on everyone, and you have quite the amount of coverage.

All it takes is the willpower to put it all in place, and tell the folks this is what it will take to make a real id.

But with that real id, so much crime will disappear. And that is problematic to the 1099 contractor crowd, because of the reality of the number of illegals in construction and other low pay occupations.